Follow THE SCOOP:

Scoop Archives

What would the Big Ten Conference be looking for in a 12th member? A strong history of success in the two major sports, football and men’s basketball. And a very good academic reputation (all current schools finished in the top 71 in the latest U.S. News & World Report rankings). A television market would be nice, as would establishing new rivalries.

IOWA STATE
Football: 6-6 (will play Minnesota in Insight Bowl)
Basketball: 7-3 (last NCAA Tournament appearance in 2005)
U.S. News & World Report: No. 88
Why them: Adding the Cyclones would give Iowa an in-state, in-conference rival that it lacks. The school is generally middle-of-the-road in both major sports, but that may not be such a bad thing — it would not rattle the status quo.
Why not: Adding Iowa State gets the Big Ten into no new media markets and the Hawkeyes already have plenty of Big Ten rivalries. There’s not a lot to gain by adding Iowa State.

MISSOURI
Football: 8-4 (will play Navy in Texas Bowl)
Basketball: 6-3 (advanced to Elite Eight last season)
U.S. News & World Report: No. 102
Why them: It puts the Big Ten firmly into the St. Louis television market, for one thing. Missouri and Illinois already have a nice rivalry going, and Missouri has solid academic credentials.
Why not: Missouri might be too far west and south for many of the conference’s existing schools. Also, would the Tigers be interested? They have a pretty good situation going in the Big 12.

RUTGERS
Football: 8-4 (will play UCF in St. Petersburg Bowl)
Basketball: 6-2 (last NCAA Tournament appearance in 1991)
U.S. News & World Report: No. 24
Why them: New York, New York. Every conference covets that television market. And Rutgers, many feel, could be the Big Ten’s link into the city that never sleeps, despite Rutger’s New Jersey location. And Rutgers is a great school.
Why not: The New York market is already saturated with professional sports. It’s unlikely anything changes with the addition of Rutgers. Besides, the Scarlet Knights would be a guaranteed No. 12 in basketball every season.

SYRACUSE
Football: 4-8 (last bowl game in 2004)
Basketball: 10-0 (currently No. 5; advanced to Sweet 16 last season)
U.S. News & World Report: No. 58
Why them: The Orange also tap into that wonderful New York market, and probably could do so in a much more substantial way. The basketball program is among the elite in the nation, and would raise the Big Ten’s profile there.
Why not: The football team has struggled, and some schools might not like the idea of such a lengthy road trip to upstate New York.

PITTSBURGH
Football: 9-3 (No. 17, will play UNC in Meineke Car Care Bowl)
Basketball: 8-2 (advanced to Elite Eight last season)
U.S. News & World Report: No. 56
Why them: A logical rivalry for Penn State, and a program that has had success on the field, on the court and in the classroom. Plus, the Pittsburgh television market is solid. Not a lot not to like here.
Why not: Penn State is already putting the Big Ten into the Pittsburgh TV market. And does Pittsburgh want to move out of the Big East?

CINCINNATI
Football: 12-0 (No. 4, will play Florida in Sugar Bowl)
Basketball: 6-2 (No. 25 currently; last NCAA Tournament appearance in 2005)
U.S. News & World Report: Tier 3
Why them: The Bearcats are a rising power in football (based on the assumption the new football coach does not ruin that), are coming back in basketball and are firmly in the Big Ten footprint.
Why not: Ohio State would likely have big problems with Cincinnati, and Indiana may too. Also, the school has a less-than-stellar academic reputation.
LOUISVILLE
Football: 4-8 (last bowl game in 2006)
Basketball: 5-3 (advanced to Elite Eight last season)
U.S. News & World Report: Tier 3
Why them: The football program could quickly rise back to prominence, and both programs are about to be in great facilities. Louisville is a solid television market, and the Cardinals could help the Big Ten’s basketball presence.
Why not: Indiana would more than likely have problems with competition in the southern Indiana market, and Ohio State would probably not like it either. And, like Cincinnati, there are academic issues.

55 comments:

What about a school like Vanderbilt? Solid academics and athletics in the Nashville Media Market.

Jay#2

Tuesday, December 15, 2009 - 6:14 PM EDT

Thank you, Hugh.
The academic issue is and will be important.

GFDave#3

Tuesday, December 15, 2009 - 6:20 PM EDT

What does Korman think PSU’s positon is on Pitt? The PSU folks I know are a little indifferent about being in the B10. Does PSU want to add Pitt to get something going again? Is PSU the principle driver behind this expansion talk?

I think most Penn State fans I know would want Pitt. There’s still the remnants of a rivalry there.

It’s strange. A lot of older Penn State fans don’t like being in the Big Ten because they preferred the glory days of being independent.

All in all, though, joining the Big Ten has been terrific for Penn State. There’s no way it could have weathered those down years in football earlier this decade without revenue sharing from the conference. It would have had to cut a few programs.

Most of its non-revenue sports have improved because of the better competition in the Big Ten. Women’s volleyball has become the dominant team in the nation, and women’s soccer has been strong.

Those of us who attended Penn State this decade have become accustomed to the Nittany Lions as part of the Big Ten. That Kerry Collins team we remember so fondly played in the Big Ten. So did Lavar Arrington and his crew. Penn State is a Big Ten team.

Penn State fans certainly want to have a rivalry with The Big Two, Michigan and Ohio State. But it’s tough to truly hate a school that does not truly hate you. Those two use up all their anger on each other.

But even the newest Penn State fans are vaguely aware of some hard feelings toward Pitt, mostly because they learn very early that the school name rhymes with a swear word.

I would guess Penn State is not the principle driver behind expansion talk, though. I’d say the Big Ten Network would have a lot to do with it, especially if it figured a way to have the TV rights for the championship game.

The football coaches are probably pushing for it, too, as they are sick of their programs exiting the fray before Thanksgiving and becoming after thoughts during the raucous weeks of conference title games and award giving.

stevealford#6

Tuesday, December 15, 2009 - 6:49 PM EDT

We should be more concerned with dropping a team (Northwestern) than adding a team. It is the Big 10 after all.

No. I don’t think Notre Dame is a possibility at this point. Joe Paterno, among others, have expressed some bitterness over a failed attempt to lure Notre Dame late last decade.

The Irish won’t make a change unless they need to. They won’t need to unless the NBC TV money dries up. Even if Notre Dame continues sinking in football, I don’t see that happening. Especially now that NBC and Comcast have coupled and appear poised to increase sports programming.

JGlessing#8

Tuesday, December 15, 2009 - 6:52 PM EDT

Does anyone know which conference brings in the most money from athletics?

Korman is half-way onto the real driver behind this crazy expansion talk: the BTN wants it, but Ro*Tel craves the thought of expanding its diced tomatoe & green chili empire. It’s like manifest destiny, mixed with queso. And imagine what Ro*Tel could do to the scrapple market. (The gastrointestinologist lobby is salavating over this possibility, as well.)

Now, if you’ll excuse me, I have to go buy a product that is completely reliant on another separate product for its relevancy.

DTFree#12

Tuesday, December 15, 2009 - 7:36 PM EDT

Its always been assumed all the TV sets in B-10 country was the biggest thing going for the conf. Just look at how many pro teams and leagues are in B-10 area. Some other conf’s are pretty much just college sports bound. So don’t put too much faith in this decision being based too strongly on the number of TVs a new school would bring. You must also look at how more clutter a new school/area brings with even more pro sports. If an area loves their school because of a lack of a pro sport franchise to cling to then they might be the best bet.

Dougy#13

Tuesday, December 15, 2009 - 8:14 PM EDT

Lets drop IU from the Big Ten and join the Big East or something? a real conference lol.

chris#14

Tuesday, December 15, 2009 - 9:06 PM EDT

we are also behind the 8 ball on teams with the nick name of tigers.. the SEC has 2 of them!! with this logic we need mizzou.. we dont need anymore cats as we have a nitany lion and the wildcats, so that would eliminate cinci and pitt. i am sure Ro*Tel need to expand the market in the state of mizzou.

Why ND: Throw out the records, they draw crowds & viewers like few other programs in the world. Period. They’re geographically centered, and they’re one of the few schools in the mix that would raise the academic bar. They already have a history with several conference teams: rivalries abound. Adding ND to the Big 10 would, on average, likely boost both parties’ strength of schedule. And, uh, FOOTBALL CONFERENCE CHAMPIONSHIP GAME!!!! Who can’t get behind that?! The pairing also provides the financial safety net of revenue (and expense) sharing when ND’s programs are having down years.

Why not ND: They’ve already got a good thing going on. Aside being flush with NBC’s (& God’s) $$$, they have the freedom to do whatever they want. They can play anybody, anywhere, at any time. The recruiting advantage of this flexibility allows them to hit every major geographic region as often as they choose (Remember that home game in the Alamo Dome against WA St.? Few teams can recruit in Texas using that strategy). Their scheduling freedom maximizes national exposure and alumni support while minimizing the sting of playing in a tough conference during down years. Being bogged down in the midwest for the majority of the football season would severely limit their receipt for recruiting and exposure success.

After already having been spurned by ND recently, I doubt we’ll see them join the Big 10 anytime soon. That said, this is the same school that gave Weis a 10-yr., gazillion dollar extension after only a year and a half of success with Willingham’s players. Just because they’re rich, clad in gold, & have God on their side, they’re not immune from making decisions which no rational mind can understand.

HoosierSmitty#16

Tuesday, December 15, 2009 - 9:25 PM EDT

I heard that the Big Ten has provisions that require the school have wrestling. Does Cincinnati have wrestling? If there are requirements like that, it might eliminate some schools. Does anyone know if there is truth to this?

Personally, I like Iowa State or Pittsburgh. They make sense and are the “type” of school that I think fits the Big Ten mold. However, that’s not what the Big Ten will look at when making a run at a school.

So just like the Big Ten went after Notre Dame with $$$ signs dancing in its head, it’ll go after the school they think will make the most money for the conference. It is after all, a business.

Brad#17

Tuesday, December 15, 2009 - 9:28 PM EDT

I read on ESPN that it might take 12-18 months to research the schools and come up with possibilities. Really? How can it take any longer than about 2 weeks? There are at most about 20-25 realistic options. From there you can widdle away most for various reasons. Just ask the conferences now, start talking to some of the schools and go from there. I’m not sure why this needs to take over a year. IMO, its ND, Pitt, Mizzou, or no one. None of the others really excite me.

David#18

Tuesday, December 15, 2009 - 9:30 PM EDT

If I’m the Big Ten, I’d take (assuming no possibility of ND):

1) Mizzou – Ability to expand into the St. Louis and Kansas City markets. Solid football and basketball teams. Existing rivalry with Illinois, and the possibility of starting a rivalry with Iowa. Makes sense from a geographic and academic standpoint.

2) Pitt – Gives PSU a naturally rivalry. Great football and basketball teams. Great fit academically and geographically, but as Hugh mentioned, Pitt doesn’t allow for the Big Ten to expand in to a new market (and besides a championship game, I believe this is the main goal).

3) Syracuse – Excellent basketball program, but the football program is lacking. Good academic school, however, the Orange are quite a stretch geographically.

If the Big Ten can’t secure one of the above schools, then scrap the expansion idea. Iowa State, Rutgers, Cincinnati, and Louisville all dilute the conference in one way or another.

Nate#19

Tuesday, December 15, 2009 - 10:15 PM EDT

Pulling any Big 12 school will drop that conference to 11 teams. So I’ve heard teams like Iowa State, Nebraska and Mizzou mentioned.

1) The Big Ten said it would contact conferences first. I’m pretty sure the Big 12 won’t be incredibly pleased to lose that 12th school. In fact, I would assume the Big 12 will do anything in its power to lure its schools back to its own conference.
2) Where would the Big 12 look to find a replacement team?

and…
3) Would it be time to start thinking about a new name for the conference? It was goofy enough to have 11 teams in the Big Ten. Obviously, the oldest collegiate athletic conference has some tradition, but if it’s willing to seek out a 12th school, it should be willing to get a new name.
Let’s see…The Big Dozen? The New Big 12? The Great Lakes Conference?

chris#20

Tuesday, December 15, 2009 - 10:34 PM EDT

the big 12 will look to Utah TCU or Bosie State to replace Missouri. I think Utah makes the most sense since they have had BCS success and have had strong football AND basketball teams. the new big ten conference will be call the Big Tween conference because it is not yet a big kid on the block being the step children to the SEC.

Charles#21

Tuesday, December 15, 2009 - 10:44 PM EDT

There’s an obvious choice here…

The University of Chicago.

Original Big Ten powers unite!

DJ#22

Tuesday, December 15, 2009 - 11:30 PM EDT

when you consider geography, academics and something a lot of people forget–minor or “Olympic” sports–Pitt and Mizzou clearly seem to me to be the most logical candidates. Some of the schools mentioned, like Vandy, don’t have enough of the same minor sports that Big Ten schools have.

I would vote Pitt. The school is growing fast and its reputation as an athletic power is growing faster. They fit the mold of a B10 team in how they play (especially hoops). I know it does not grow the footprint of the conference in terms of geography or media markets, but I’d rather have an up and coming guy in our own yard join than a questionable fit outside the yard.

BeatPurdue#25

Wednesday, December 16, 2009 - 9:47 AM EDT

The Big 10 has done this before. Nothing much has changed EXCEPT Notre Dame can not hold on to it’s solo national TV deal because it is never in the top 25 at the end of the year. Notre Dame is the right fit. Pittsburgh is a good fit. Rutgers is interesting. No one wants to go to Syracuse! Missouri, Louisville, Cincinnati, Iowa State add nothing. If all you get is a $5 million football game each existing school will LOSE MONEY-1/11 versus 1/12 of the pie, if $100 million now for 11 schools = $9,090,909 versus $105 million for 12 schools = $8,750,000. How about Maryland in the Baltimore-DC market, or Miami in the FL market, or GA Tech in Atlanta, or SMU in Dallas, or Colorado in the Rockies? The whole point is to expand the BRAND and raise the profits from the Big Ten Network so the PIE grows! What if the presidents say “OK” but no other good school says “yes”? The Big Ten looks like chump change. There is more risk here than is obvious. In this kind of a deal you do not want “transparency” you want a solid private commitment and a one year or less time frame, so that the commitment does not unravel. I thought that all of the academic presidents had been replaced by smooth political operatives? This is politically naive.

Ryan#26

Wednesday, December 16, 2009 - 10:13 AM EDT

There is no need to eliminate non-AAU schools. Michigan State, for example, was not part of the AAU when they were invited. They were invited about ten years after they joined.

tberry#27

Wednesday, December 16, 2009 - 10:53 AM EDT

I have no idea where they rank in some of the requisite criteria mentioned in the article but I think LOUISVILLE would be a good choice they are good geographically.

They expand us into SEC territory. They would be competitive in Basketball and Football.

Husky Tom#28

Wednesday, December 16, 2009 - 11:02 AM EDT

Someone may have addressed this already, but my question is, if a 12th team were added, could we see the league be split into two 6-team divisions like the SEC?

From a Hoosier football fan’s standpoint, it would be awesome to see us slip into some sort of “Big 10 West” division with Iowa, Illinois, Northwestern, Wisconsin, and Minnesota. If the 12th team is, say, Louisville or Rutgers, then the Big 10 East would be Mich, Mich St., Purdue, Ohio State, Penn St., and Louisville/Rutgers.

jubilee#29

Wednesday, December 16, 2009 - 12:00 PM EDT

Tom,

Never be split up like that due to Michigan, OSU, and Penn State being in the same division. Probably have IU and Purdue in the east and Michigan and MSU in the west.

Hoosier Clarion#30

Wednesday, December 16, 2009 - 12:52 PM EDT

Why stop at 12 to extend the footprint. If it is so hard to figure out who the ideal 1 should be maybe the top 3 should be added for a Big 7+7 or add 5 for a Superior 16. Seems the Big East grew in a short time. ESPN would have to add numbers to their clock face.

GFDave#31

Wednesday, December 16, 2009 - 1:07 PM EDT

I went onto the Mizzou and Pitt Rivals sites to read their respective comments on possibly joining the B10.

The Pitt comments were entirely negative. They feel the B10 would be a step down for them. I know Big East bball is very good and often superior to the B10, but I don’t see it at all in football. Some people there also think PSU has such an intense desire to avoid Pitt that they would actually quit the conference if Pitt joined. Wow. Some of them saw no fit whatsoever and think we are a rural conference (I guess somewhere along the line Pittsburgh became much more cosmopolitan than Chicago, Minneapolis, and Columbus. Madison is a state capitol for pete’s sake. East Lansing and Ann Arbor are not rural in anyway.) Double Wow.

My feeling on Pitt is that they are not in a real conference right now. The Big East is a basketball only concept that morphed into football too. But, only a handful of their schools play the game and one of their members, ND, refuses to allow their football team to play with them. If you care about all of your sports, you don’t want to be in a league that allows its members to pick their affiliations ala carte.

The Mizzou fans seemed much more open to the situation and are primarily concerned about losing their exposure to Texas football recruits. I think that is the only part of being associated with Texas that they like.

Jay#32

Wednesday, December 16, 2009 - 2:03 PM EDT

GFDave,
Thank you for the leg work. What you discovered was interesting.

pb#33

Wednesday, December 16, 2009 - 2:13 PM EDT

louisville makes sense. 5 big 10 schools within a 4-5 hr drive, fans travel very well, a new 22,000 seat basketball arena that will be full every night, 56,000 seat football stadium that can be expanded to over 80,000 seats….and the president of the big 10 was the former president of the ohio valley conference…..that could help? Why the big 10 would want pitt, rutgers or syracuse is beyond me. Those fans dont travel well at all. Go Cards!

pb#34

Wednesday, December 16, 2009 - 2:25 PM EDT

And if you think the big 10 would not gain nothing with louisville you are nuts! Look at the top bball schools profit and tv ratings. There is alot more to gain with louisville than mizzou. Your not gonna boost football in any aspect unless you get notre dame, not gonna happen. Louisville could be a very strong big 10 city…tons of Indiana and Ohio St fans live here in louisville. Me as a louisville fan would love to play in the Big 10…and a football championship game!

GFDave#35

Wednesday, December 16, 2009 - 2:51 PM EDT

Louisville is athletically a good fit like you say. I think UL’s hurdles are TV money and academics. Its important to note that the Commissioner has stated that the B10 wants an institution, not just a team, so factors other than sports come into play.

Louisville doesn’t add much to the Big Ten Network tv market. Rutgers, Pitt and Missouri are more attractive that way.

Academically, all of the B10 schools are members of the Association of American Universities. This is a group of 62 leading research schools, both public and private. Louisville is not a member and that would be an issue.

The US News and World Report ranks U of L as a tier 3 school. That’s not good. There are 128 schools that are numerically ranked, then the pool of tier 3 schools are lumped together. The lowest ranking of any B10 school is 71st, a tie between MSU, IU and Iowa. If you throw out the private schools, MSU, IU and Iowa tie for 29th among public schools, Louisville doesn’t appear on the list, which ends at 64.

I will say this though. The academic profile of frosh entering U of L is only slightly lower than that of IU, so its not the students that are the issue. Maybe its professors, facilities, etc. I don’t know.

chris#36

Wednesday, December 16, 2009 - 2:53 PM EDT

I think a SEC set up is the best for the new 12 Team Big Ten set up.. you have 6 teams in each division and you play the 5 other teams annually. you play one team every year as your out of divsion rival, and then you rotate the other team every year.
Lakes Division
-Minnesota – Iowa
-Wisconsin – New B10 Team
-Mich St – Penn St
-Mich – Ohio St
-Purdue – Indiana
-Northwestern – Illinios
River Divsion
-Mizzou; Pitt; Rutgers; ect
-Indiana
-Ohio St
-Penn St
-Iowa
-Illinios

IU Big Ten Football Schedule
New B10 Team
@Ohio St
Penn St
@Iowa
Illinios
@Minnesota (this game rotates)
Purdue
What do you all think?? It keeps all the rivals together. The only thing i dont like is having a potential rematch in the conference champ game. if looking at the past big ten titles the OSU MICH game was a de facto champ game. So maybe having them in the same division would be a good thing so they would play for the chance to get into the conference champ game.

GFDave#37

Wednesday, December 16, 2009 - 3:10 PM EDT

When we visited IU, my kids wouldn’t buy the idea that the Jordan River was actually a river. Now I have proof, IU is in the River Division.

Bettor#38

Wednesday, December 16, 2009 - 3:43 PM EDT

That conference alignment is retarded.

Any conference alignment would be an east-west deal, with PSU, UM, MSU, OSU in the east while Iowa, Minnesota, and Wisconsin are in the west.

You don’t break up the triangle of hate (IA/MN/WI) and you don’t separate UM and OSU, UM and MSU, or MSU and PSU. Keep rivalries.

Don’t know who we would add as the 12th team but that would help determine where IL/NU (likely West) and IU/PU (likely East) are placed.

IU/PU could be split up if we were to add a Big East team. Otherwise you’re looking at this:

Bringing in Iowa State, Missouri would complement it well as they are rivals with teams in the West (Iowa and Illinois respectively). However, they add nothing to our conference.

You add ND and we have problems, because they should be in the East with Purdue, Michigan State, Michigan who they play every year. Then rivalries get screwed up. Same goes for adding a BE team.

pb#39

Wednesday, December 16, 2009 - 4:26 PM EDT

GFdave…I agree the Big 10 wants a school with good academics. Louisville is turning the corner. Mich. St..a Big 10 team did not become a member of the AAU for 10 years AFTER they joined the conference. Is there a double standard? Maybe Louisville joining the Big 10 would put Louisville on the next academic platform. TV? Louisville has some of the highest rated Bball games in the country. The louisville TV market every year has the top 5 market share during the NCAA basketball tourney. We are in the top 5 year in and out in Bball profits. We took alot more fans to Indy last year when we played Mich St. in the elite 8…alot more. TV, fan base, profit at UofL are tops in the nation. Academics do need help though, that can change.

hoosierdad#40

Wednesday, December 16, 2009 - 5:09 PM EDT

If the goal is to have a 2 division conference (and money isn’t #1 priority), then you could drop Penn St. and go back to 10 teams (2 5-team divisions). This would also save alot of money on the non-revenue sports by elimanating travel to Happy Valley. How much does it cost to send the baseball or softball team from Iowa to Penn St.? Or, drop Northwestern since it is not a land grant institution and you get to 10 teams. This also gets you back to an 18 game round robin basketball league schedule home and home. I live in the Louisville area. Trust me, U of L is not up to snuff academically.

pb#41

Wednesday, December 16, 2009 - 5:37 PM EDT

Hoosierdad if you have not looked it up our freshman class is not to far behind IUs. And trust me, IU does not want to get their butt kicked by UofL in all sports… The soccer program here is gaining speed along with baseball, tennis, and swimming.

eric#42

Wednesday, December 16, 2009 - 5:47 PM EDT

Chris, good job on laying out possible permanent rivals. The only problem with that is basketball rivals only playing once a year across division, like IU and Purdue. Hoops really isn’t a concern in the SEC. But that wouldn’t be a deal breaker in my estimation.

GFDave, I don’t know what the Pitt fans are looking at, thinking the Big Ten is a ‘rural’ league. We have teams in several large markets, and even the ones that aren’t, including IU, have big fan bases in large markets. Ever notice how many Iowa alums seem to be in Chicago?? A lot, in my experience.

I lean toward east-west divisions, because the new team would likely be from the east or west edge of the conference (Missouri/Nebraska; Pitt/Syracuse, to stick with my candidates).

Lot of good thoughts on this board on this subject.

chris#43

Wednesday, December 16, 2009 - 7:55 PM EDT

bettor with all due respect the problem of splitting up east and west is a a dramatic shift in power to the east. unless nebraska some how would join the big ten! to answer your question about basketball rivalries we play 17 conference basketball games a year so you could play your out of division rival twice along with all divisional opponents. i think this is by far the best way to do it. i dont think bettor has the logic to see how the extra rival game preserves rivalries.

David#44

Wednesday, December 16, 2009 - 8:03 PM EDT

To correct someone’s earlier post, Missouri is a member of the AAU.

Nate#45

Wednesday, December 16, 2009 - 8:17 PM EDT

So here’s a scenario (not original…from the IndyStar):
Add Butler. The football program went 11-1 in 1-AA this past season, but it would have to move up to the FBS level – play games at Lucas Oil Stadium (a la South Florida playing at Raymond James Stadium). If you think Butler is too small a school, it has almost the same number of students as Wake Forest.

The basketball and academics are definitely there. A new market? No.

The likelihood of it happening? Little to none. But since we’re all speculating anyways…

Mike#46

Wednesday, December 16, 2009 - 9:41 PM EDT

Is West Virginia a decent consideration? Or is the academics too average and market too small.

Bettor#47

Wednesday, December 16, 2009 - 11:14 PM EDT

Of course there’s power teams in the east. But you need to keep rivalries together, and you need to place teams who are closer to each other together to save on travel expenses. Competitive balance is not important. Big 12 South (OU or Texas) has won the conference the past 6 years.

Keep in mind the protected rivalries. These are teams that play each other every year. They will have to piece together divisions with this in mind.

Man, I have been sick and am feeling better. I have read a lot but too tired to type. I have enjoyed all posts on this topic. I especially enjoyed reading what the Pitt and Mizzou say on the message boards…nice job GFdave. When this came up in rumor a few years back, it was just my gut that it would be one of these 2 schools, Pitt or Missouri.
Just opinion, it would seem weird with Rutgers or Syracuse, not sure I even know why. I think of that as NY and NJ area. It does not seem remotely Midwestern or Big 10 to me. I assume there would not be a market in the Iowa St area, just gut. Cinci, ever been to that campus? It would take over for ugliest campus and beat PU if they joined plus the basketball program has always seemed shady to me for whatever reason. Louisville I can see a little actually but in the end I would say it comes down to Pitt or Mizzou.
Funny what the message boards are saying about the Big 10 being rural. The East is full of prima donnas. I will never forget the first year PSU came to Bloomington for football…first time I ever saw anyone from my family get into it with another group of fans.

SH22#51

Saturday, December 19, 2009 - 3:09 PM EDT

Looks like they’re thinking small time to me.

From a conference standpoint, a business development stand point, the big ten sghould be looking for a lot more than 1 more team.

More like 5 more quality programs would really bring the revenues up.

If geography IS really important, then think Pitt and WVa on the eastern edge; and, Mizzou, Kansas and Neb to the west. However, you could go with Cincy, Louisville and Tennessee or even Arkansas to the south.

Let’s not get snobbish over academic rankings, these are all quality programs that offer great matchups in both football and basketball. I would certainly watch IU play any of the teams on TV.

A 16 team, 2 division conference works pretty good for the SEC. I don’t think you’d have to work too hard to figure out who plays where.

Mike fornear#52

Saturday, December 19, 2009 - 5:58 PM EDT

Does anyone out there have a feel for what the buy in price for a 12th school would be? Pitt made 1.5 mil from Big East football TV this season, and as we understand it here, the Big 10 network generates 20 million per school. We would love to have that cash, but the Big 10 isn’t going to just give it away are they?

Jon#53

Saturday, January 9, 2010 - 3:03 PM EDT

Adding Rutgers is pointless. The Big East would not add Northwestern to captivate the Chicago media market, because they are not stupid and know that everyone in Chicago is an Illinois fan. Same with Vandy and Nashville and Pitt and Pittsburgh; Tennessee and Penn State are as dominant in those markets as the teams which reside there. I think they’ll add Missouri. Illinois has a small presence in the St. Louis market, but their main contribution to the Conference is Chicago, not STL. MU would also bring the KC market. Iowa State is also stupid because Des Moines is already equally Iowa country as it is Cyclone country.

Jeff#54

Friday, January 15, 2010 - 5:20 PM EDT

Jon,

You don’t know what you’re talking about if you think that “everyone in Chicago is an Illinois fan” or that Penn State dominates Pittsburgh. Have you even been to those cities?

By the way, Kansas, not Missouri, is the most popular program in KC.

michael#55

Tuesday, February 16, 2010 - 2:28 AM EDT

Kentucky would make a lot of sense for the big 10. Their football fan base is larger than at least 6 big 10 schools. There Basketball fan base is bigger than “anyone”. Their fans travel very well and geographily Kentucky is a great fit. Makes a lot more sense than Texas.

JUCO transfer Patrick could be an instant hit -CHICAGO — Junior college transfer Camion Patrick could become an instant impact receiver in Kevin Wilson’s offense this fall. First, he has to become academically eligible.
[...]

3-star safety Thompson to join Hoosiers in 2016 -He doesn’t stress prestige and he doesn’t harp on wins and losses. Iowa Western football coach Scott Strohmeier tells his junior college players to settle on the program that feels right, and the rest
[...]

Hoosier history doesn't have to remain binding -CHICAGO — Back in December, left arm still in a sling from the separated shoulder that had wrecked his season, Indiana quarterback Nate Sudfeld found himself sitting across a table from all-time Hoosi
[...]

JUCO transfer Patrick could be an instant hit -CHICAGO — Junior college transfer Camion Patrick could become an instant impact receiver in Kevin Wilson’s offense this fall. First, he has to become academically eligible.
[...]

3-star safety Thompson to join Hoosiers in 2016 -He doesn’t stress prestige and he doesn’t harp on wins and losses. Iowa Western football coach Scott Strohmeier tells his junior college players to settle on the program that feels right, and the rest
[...]

Hoosier history doesn't have to remain binding -CHICAGO — Back in December, left arm still in a sling from the separated shoulder that had wrecked his season, Indiana quarterback Nate Sudfeld found himself sitting across a table from all-time Hoosi
[...]